"Harvard has demonstrated," she concluded, "that there are no workable and available race-neutral alternatives, singly or taken in combination, that would allow it to achieve an adequately diverse student body while still perpetuating its standards for academic and other measures of excellence.
Harvard responded that descriptions like quiet and studious had been used for students who were not Asian-American as well, and that admissions officers looked not just at the larger group, but at more disadvantaged subsets of Asian-Americans, like Cambodians or Vietnamese.Students for Fair Admissions has filed another affirmative action case against the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, which is scheduled to go to trial in May. He was succeeded last year by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, whose record is more conservative than Kennedy's.The Trump administration submitted a "statement of interest" in the Harvard case, siding with the SFFA challengers and noting that the administration was investigating Harvard's screening processes after complaints to the Department of Education from more than 60 Asian American groups.
Regents of the Burroughs found that "Harvard's admission program passes constitutional muster in that it satisfies the dictates of strict scrutiny. Harvard reports that of those students entering this fall as the class of 2023, Asian Americans make up 25.6%, African Americans 13.1% Hispanics 11.8% and Native Americans and Native Hawaiians 2.2%.
"Regarding the Asian American "personal" ratings, Burroughs said she saw "no evidence of discrimination" beyond a "slight numerical disparity. In deciding the case, a federal judge will have to weigh complex and competing statistical evidence presented by both sides. Harvard President Lawrence Bacow added, "The consideration of race, alongside many other factors, helps us achieve our goal of creating a diverse student body that enriches the education of every student.
"The ruling in the closely watched case is likely to be appealed and culminate in a national showdown over The challengers had argued at trial that as Harvard's "personal" rating system disfavors Asian Americans, it favors blacks and Hispanics, who generally have lower standardized test scores compared with Asian Americans.The storied Cambridge, Massachusetts, campus accepts only about 5% of its 40,000 applicants each year. Filed on behalf of Asian Americans but without any named individuals alleging bias, the case has accelerated simmering complaints from students of Asian heritage that their numbers at Ivy League institutions are capped, just as Jewish students faced quotas on elite campuses in the last century.At its broadest, Blum crafted the case to challenge a 1978 Supreme Court precedent that first upheld campus affirmative action, permitting universities to consider the race of an applicant among many factors, toward the goal of greater campus diversity, and forbidding racial quotas in admissions. The ruling protected affirmative action but did not give Harvard a complete pass on discrimination against Asians, offering Asian Americans the … The Harvard ruling comes as college admissions practices are being scrutinized nationwide, including by federal prosecutors who allege that celebrity and other wealthy parents paid off coaches and education administrators to falsify student records to help them win acceptance at elite schools. "Edward Blum, a conservative lawyer who had engineered the challenge filed in 2014, said his group, Students for Fair Admissions, would appeal to decision for the 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals.
As the court has recognized, now is not the time to turn back the clock on diversity and opportunity." "An appeal of Burroughs' ruling would go first to the 1st Circuit, before any battle over race at the reconstituted Supreme Court, with two new appointees of President Donald Trump.